it doesn't seem that popular in Australia, for exactly the reasons outlined in here www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... bfed79839c Though I assume it has become more popular since the exact same situation led to an incorrect decision wrongly keeping them in the 4 nations

it doesn't seem that popular in Australia, for exactly the reasons outlined in here www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... bfed79839c Though I assume it has become more popular since the exact same situation led to an incorrect decision wrongly keeping them in the 4 nations

And yet it wasn't a try, so it's a good job they checked everything!

What would really be a farce is if we decided that pushing people away off the ball is now a legal tactic

whether it was a try or not it is a very good example of the problem.

So much went on that incident that the ref just didn't know if it was a try or not, there were a million offside possibilities, a couple of knock on and a possible push (which was a very insignificant one) what was wrong with him letting that play run on and leaving it to the VR? That incident didn't have particularly clear evidence of anything and I would bet a pound to a penny that NONE of the incidents in that play would have been over-ruled by the VR and we would have been left with a ref guessing something he admitted he just didn't know.

It seems absolutely nuts that we are now demanding the ref 'have a guess' and try and disprove that rather than just making the best decision from the information available.

I think we should give refs more credit here. I don't think they go through matches just guessing decisions. No matter how much it appears that way from the terraces and when a call goes against your team.

Refs call it as they see it and this rule change doesn't change that. There is the option, as before, to check that they were correct. It doesn't really change anything at all. If he/she 'guesses' at a decision, because they did not see what happened (e.g Hall), then the VR will find 'sufficient evidence' if they look hard enough to come out with the correct decision.

This is probably a way of justifying the decision to go to to the VR maybe? Or clarifying why exactly they are asking the VR to look at it: 'I saw it as a try, but can we double check the offside?', for example.

Agree with Smokey. The refs opinion is pretty much invalidated by the fact he's referred it to the VR.

Have the VR start with an open mind from the beginning and not be swayed one way or another.

Just get rid of the VR.

Don't know how a ref would cope without VR Leaguefan. Last Hull derby at Craven Park, almost every single try was referred to VR if I remember rightly, might have been 1 or 2 that were given without lol.

He'd cope by making a decision himself (for good or bad). This may come as something of a surprise, but there are usually 5 games in SL and many more in the Championship & Championship 1 every week where this process happens.

Removing the VR would also hasten the redundancy of Ganson, a day when celebrations can be had, although I suspect he's due a testimonial at FC for the service he gave your club.

5.2431640625:5